Re: new heapcheck contrib module - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: new heapcheck contrib module
Date
Msg-id CAH2-Wz=PYjiL=6badH+NNyvCM1_LstEhCLQd3arLQWPtMkAX5w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: new heapcheck contrib module  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: new heapcheck contrib module  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:41 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> But now I see that there's no secondary permission check in the
> verify_nbtree.c code. Is that intentional? Peter, what's the
> justification for that?

As noted by comments in contrib/amcheck/sql/check_btree.sql (the
verify_nbtree.c tests), this is intentional. Note that we explicitly
test that a non-superuser role can perform verification following
GRANT EXECUTE ON FUNCTION ... .

As I mentioned earlier, this is supported (or at least it is supported
in my interpretation of things). It just isn't documented anywhere
outside the test itself.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Improper use about DatumGetInt32
Next
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: Keep elog(ERROR) and ereport(ERROR) calls in the cold path